Minds and Machines 5 (4):467-487 (1995)
|Abstract||Heuristics can be regarded as justifying the actions and beliefs of problem-solving agents. I use an analysis of heuristics to argue that a symbiotic relationship exists between traditional epistemology and contemporary artificial intelligence. On one hand, the study of models of problem-solving agents usingquantitative heuristics, for example computer programs, can reveal insight into the understanding of human patterns of epistemic justification by evaluating these models'' performance against human problem-solving. On the other hand,qualitative heuristics embody the justifying ability of defeasible rules, the understanding of which is provided by traditional epistemology.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Miriam Solomon (1992). Scientific Rationality and Human Reasoning. Philosophy of Science 59 (3):439-455.
Oswald Huber (2000). What's in the Adaptive Toolbox: Global Heuristics or More Elementary Components? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):755-755.
Nick Chater (2000). How Smart Can Simple Heuristics Be? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):745-746.
Adam Morton (2000). Heuristics All the Way Up? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):758-759.
Michael E. Gorman (2000). Heuristics in Technoscientific Thinking. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):752-752.
Michael Huemer (2001). The Problem of Defeasible Justification. Erkenntnis 54 (3):375-397.
Gerd Gigerenzer & Thomas Sturm (2012). How (Far) Can Rationality Be Naturalized? Synthese 187 (1):243-268.
William C. Wimsatt (2000). Heuristics Refound. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):766-767.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads9 ( #114,124 of 549,128 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?